[3889]
...
¿Por qué comprar un AWB en lugar de un MAB?
Moody 376 vs bavaria 37
- Thread starter gasdave
- Start date
¿Por qué comprar un AWB en lugar de un MAB?
pvb
Well-known member
Seven Spades
Well-known member
Well your figures are wrong, see the attached image. The HR378 is on the left and weighs 7500KGS and has a ballast ratio of 38.67% the BAV 37 (2007) weighs 5360kgs and has a ballast ratio of 33.21. So the Bavaria is longer, wider, has a higher centre of gravity and has a shorter keel. The differences in the way these two boats behave is profound.
I tried to provide you will a simple clear answer to your question and you dismissed it out of hand and it is quite clear that you don't understand what you are talking about and are not open minded enough to listen to the advice of others, advice YOU sought.
You will only learn the hard way.
Good luck.
FWIW a Starlight 35 has a balast ratio of 40%
Hypocacculus
New member
I can only contribute what I've experienced comparing sailing on 44ft Bavaria and 46ft Moody, so slightly larger.
Interior fit out - Moody won hands down, no question.
Light winds - Moody required at least 12 knots wind to get it moving. In UK waters no problem. In parts of the Med, resigned to motoring everywhere.
Marina parking. Moody long fin makes confined marina manouvring interesting but not insurmountable given a little skill. Bavaria more manouverable.
Heavy Weather - Moody every time.
Build Quality - Moody built like the proverbial brick outhouse - the locker lids would have your arm off. Bavaria far, far lighter.
Helming - Moody tracks like a dream; Bavaria more tender.
If I were offered one of the two, I'd have taken the Moody.
Interior fit out - Moody won hands down, no question.
Light winds - Moody required at least 12 knots wind to get it moving. In UK waters no problem. In parts of the Med, resigned to motoring everywhere.
Marina parking. Moody long fin makes confined marina manouvring interesting but not insurmountable given a little skill. Bavaria more manouverable.
Heavy Weather - Moody every time.
Build Quality - Moody built like the proverbial brick outhouse - the locker lids would have your arm off. Bavaria far, far lighter.
Helming - Moody tracks like a dream; Bavaria more tender.
If I were offered one of the two, I'd have taken the Moody.
Tranona
Well-known member
Would help if you checked your facts. The data on the Bavaria you have quoted is WRONG - it is from the 2001 37, although the photo shows the later model.
pvb was correct (from the Bavaria brochure of 2007) Displacement 6900kg ballast 2000kg (29%) and draught (standard) 1.95m Hull length is the same, LWL is less and beam slightly more.
Talulah
Well-known member
I've not read the full thread but Bavaria use a lot of non-standard parts. Moody - it's all standard sizes.
Bend a stanchion on a Moody - buy an off the shelve Vetus stanchion. Bend a Bavaria stanchion and you've got to buy a Bavaria stanchion if you want the middle hole at the same height.
Need to replace the foredeck hatch on a Moody. No problem. Off the shelve standard size. Bavaria - looks standard size but isn't. you'll have to slightly enlarge the opening or buy the special Bavaria model.
Stanchion mounts are another example.
Bend a stanchion on a Moody - buy an off the shelve Vetus stanchion. Bend a Bavaria stanchion and you've got to buy a Bavaria stanchion if you want the middle hole at the same height.
Need to replace the foredeck hatch on a Moody. No problem. Off the shelve standard size. Bavaria - looks standard size but isn't. you'll have to slightly enlarge the opening or buy the special Bavaria model.
Stanchion mounts are another example.
pvb
Well-known member
Err... it seems that you're the one who doesn't understand what he's talking about!
pvb
Well-known member
Thanks, Tranona, but I don't think Seven Spades is receptive to facts.
Seven Spades
Well-known member
Ok so lets take your figures it is wider and lighter and has a much lower ballast ratio. It will sit higher in the water and have a much higher centre of gravity. I think I will concede that the term "light displacement" is really being used perhaps missleadingly a synonym for "low density" and the two boats most definitely do not have similar densities.
Birdseye
Well-known member
I can understand this sentiment and to a degree I agree with it. But, it is a bit too black and white. I have several times bought a boat of the age of that Bavaria only to find that obsolescence of boat equipment starts at year 10 or thereabouts. So you would be buying the Bav at just the time that it starts to need some expensive bits and pieces. And if you keep it for 10 years as you think possible, you will definitely be into the territory where things like engines need major work or replacement.
So rather than just take things as 87 vs 2007, I suggest you make a list of major bits ( engine, electronics, rigging, winches and windlass, sails etc) and make a list for each boat of how old these bits are.
As for boat quality, the Moody will be more heavily built with more solid woodwork but a bit like comparing an older Rover with a more modern Renault, things have moved on and build quality has improved. I would probably go for the Moody but then I always go for older Merc / BMW rather than new Renault
One final comment. Depreciation. My guess is that you will lose more on the Bav but it is a guess.
GrahamM376
New member
Far too black and white. I don't understand these statements such as pvb's "An 87 boat is going to be a constant maintenance issue" as it certainly hasn't been my experience with either of the Moodies I've had, the Centaur and Berwick yes but they were both '70s boats. Last year I replaced the batteries and changed the through hulls, so far this season in 4 months and around 400nm I have had to oil the anemometer and replace a sail slug so, where's this constant maintenance issue?
silver-fox
Active member
We had very similar issues to consider in that the final choice for us was between a fully equipped and maintained boat v a boat of the same model and but vintage which had been lightly used but had no investment made in her since she was built. It was clear a significant investment was required in the second option.
I was favouring the better maintained option but my wife pointed out that if we took on the neglected option and brought it up to scratch (the boat itself was sound) we would be assured of
-new rigging
- new tender and outboard
- new sails
-new electronics
- etc etc etc etc etc
In the end I followed her advice (let's pretend here I had a choice) and put in an offer that reflected the need for the investment and eventually it was accepted. Yes there was a lot of expense as predicted but we now get the benefit and use out of our investment.
As a previous poster mentioned at 7 years old a boat is 3 years short of needing much of this spend (certainly standing rigging and sails). Of course by selling at 7 years the previous owner has been quite sensible, he had his use out of the boat and sells before the larger bills start rolling in. (You can imagine what a different proposition the boat will be in just 3 seasons).
So I guess in summary, my suggestion is to consider where the boat is positioned on the investment cycle and tailor your offer accordingly.
Looking back at my decision, one of the best calls we made was to avoid teak decks. I would love them, I think they look lovely and are a real joy, but they do get very hot in the Med sunshine and the cost of replacement is astronomic!!!!
I was favouring the better maintained option but my wife pointed out that if we took on the neglected option and brought it up to scratch (the boat itself was sound) we would be assured of
-new rigging
- new tender and outboard
- new sails
-new electronics
- etc etc etc etc etc
In the end I followed her advice (let's pretend here I had a choice) and put in an offer that reflected the need for the investment and eventually it was accepted. Yes there was a lot of expense as predicted but we now get the benefit and use out of our investment.
As a previous poster mentioned at 7 years old a boat is 3 years short of needing much of this spend (certainly standing rigging and sails). Of course by selling at 7 years the previous owner has been quite sensible, he had his use out of the boat and sells before the larger bills start rolling in. (You can imagine what a different proposition the boat will be in just 3 seasons).
So I guess in summary, my suggestion is to consider where the boat is positioned on the investment cycle and tailor your offer accordingly.
Looking back at my decision, one of the best calls we made was to avoid teak decks. I would love them, I think they look lovely and are a real joy, but they do get very hot in the Med sunshine and the cost of replacement is astronomic!!!!
Sailfree
Well-known member
There is Depreciation and Ownership Cost.
Difference is that Ownership Cost = Depreciation + Repair/Replacement Costs
I think Ownership Cost is more relevant for obvious reasons on older boats
pvb
Well-known member
Sorry to keep mentioning this, but I don't understand the "heavily built" argument at all. Take off the ballast weight and the Moody 376 is 4870kg; take off the ballast weight and the Bavaria 37 is 4900kg - heavier than the Moody. Assuming their rigs, engines, etc, are similarly proportioned, in what way is the Moody "more heavily built"? If its woodwork is more substantial, it would seem that its hull must be less substantial.
GrahamM376
New member
Cut a hole in a Moody and then a Bavaria (I've done both) and you will see where the heavier build is. I took a core out of our cockpit coaming for an instrument and it's 18mm thick, the Bavaria I worked on had far less on the transom - which was cracked after a minor collision.
pvb
Well-known member
OK, so if the Moody has thicker fibreglass, its woodwork must be more lightly built than the Bavaria's.
Edit: It seems the Moody Owners' Association reckons the displacement of the 376 is only 7373kg which, less 2950kg ballast, gives a boat weight of 4423kg versus 4900kg for the Bavaria 37.
Last edited:
GrahamM376
New member
If one item (regardless of what it si) weighs the same as another larger volume one, both without anything bolted on, don't you agree that one must have heavier layup/be thicker than the other?
James_Calvert
Well-known member
eg: a bigger Easter egg of the same weight has the thinner chocolate?
pvb
Well-known member
I don't understand the point you're trying to make. The Moody 376 is longer than the Bavaria (11.53m vs 11.35m) and is a smidgeon beamier (3.81 vs 3.80). So isn't the Moody the larger volume boat?
